Review: SHARD (REWRITE 2)

Script review for triggerstreet.com

SHARD (REWRITE 2) - by Chris Simons

I’ve taken a couple of days between reading Shard (Rewrite 2) and writing my review to let my thoughts percolate because it generated conflicting reactions warranting deeper consideration.

On the one hand I very much enjoyed reading it and thought it contained some excellent writing but on the other hand, upon reflection, I found both the concept and execution somewhat disjointed.

A screenplay needs to catch and hold the readers attention and imagination – and this you achieve admirably. Gib’s opening scenes have a great flow to them and generate a strong sympathy for the mute girl. McKenzie is another well crafted character, an intriguing and endearing protector and mentor. The lodge is an arena of great cinematic potential, an original and evocative visual creation which helps hold together a strong and consistent atmosphere. Dialogue is kept snappy and scene descriptions are usually aptly worded. The plot is well structured with key turning points arriving bang-on the prescribed pages and the story seems carefully developed, without any obvious plot-holes.

Shard reads extremely easily from beginning to end with moments of powerful visual impact and the writer should be extremely proud of their achievement. It’s a very good script but it can still be improved upon and is definitely worthy of further efforts to help it reach its full potential.

Shard is a revenge story, a subgenre which has been explored by some of the greatest filmmakers working in recent years. By comparing Shard to two of the most successful recent revenge stories, Kill Bill and Oldboy, I can hopefully articulate my current reservations and offer some suggestions on how Shard could be streamlined for greater impact.

A revenge story has two principle characters, The Wronged, who takes revenge on The Victim. Either of these roles can act as the protagonist; in Kill Bill we follow The Wronged as she exacts her revenge upon each and every person who wronged her; in Oldboy we follow The Victim as he endures the revenge being unleashed upon him.

My primary concern for Shard is that we follow both sides equally. In Act 1 our focus is definitely with Gib and our heart goes out to her but in Act 2 we focus on the brothers’ relationships, with Gib starring primarily as Caleb’s love interest. In Act 3, Gib retakes centre stage as she takes her revenge. The result, in my opinion, is to split the audience’s support between the two factions. Traditionally, a revenge tale is focused upon whichever party survives, in this case Gib. Any empathy developed for the victims risks undermining support for Gib’s accomplishment.

I think I understand the writer’s intentions in focusing the second act on the brothers to let them develop as strong characters in their own right, with goals and arcs of their own which are cut short by Gib’s revenge, making it less a clear-cut revenge story and more a complex scenario. Unfortunately, in my opinion, this strategy is unsuccessful because it’s Gib who, in the end, is victorious, and Gib whose actions we should really rally behind. It is a classic revenge story and I believe that the closer the writer can adhere to the conventions of the subgenre the greater the impact of the climatic scenes will be.

It feels like the writer was drawn to the brothers’ story, their relationships and back story show significant development has been invested in them, but for the sake of Gib’s story they are simply the adversaries and details such as Carson’s guilt over his Mother’s death are completely irrelevant. That’s not to say such moments aren’t well written and evocative, simply that the story may be better served focusing on other matters.

I know it may seem a fairly drastic alteration, but in my opinion the script would be best served by focusing your next rewrite on Act 2, keeping the focus on Gib as much as possible. There are key moments in her development which are currently only explored in flashback which have great dramatic potential; when she breaks out of her catatonic trance, when she speaks for the first time, when she interprets the ball lightning as a visit from McKenzie’s spirit, when she fixates on revenge, when she befriends the pastor and fakes finding Jesus to speed her release from the institute, etc. Following this chain of events has just as much dramatic potential as the brothers’ post-war re-union, but would also keep the most important thread of the story, Gib’s, front and centre. We could still be re-introduced to the brothers through Gib’s eyes upon her release and learn much of the same information about them, but they would be cast squarely as her adversaries, with her actions carrying more value than theirs.

It would then become vital to make the post-institute Gib remain sympathetic, to keep the audience on her side as she becomes an Angel of Vengeance, rather than risk her becoming a single-minded machine. Fluctuations in her resolve and some inner conflict about the path she’s chosen would work here, perhaps with the lightning theme serving as omens when needed to let her know she’s still on the right path.

In conclusion, the script is currently very enjoyable and well written but if the writer is serious about turning it into a saleable piece I honestly think he’d do well to consider rewriting in the directions outlined to adhere to revenge story conventions. I believe the story has the potential and the writer has the ability, and there’s considerable promise here.

If you’ve found my notes helpful or thought provoking and would like to discuss any of these suggestions in more detail, please don’t hesitate to contact me.